In the ads, the company spoke about the "uglier side" of the 6 1/2-month strike by 3,000 members of USW Local 6500 against the Brazil-based miner.

Vale Inco claims non-union and other employees have been subjected to death threats, "terrorizing and threatening spouse and children," damage to private property and now, "an apparently premeditated three-on-one assault on an individual who was doing nothing more than jogging in broad daylight on our community's streets."

The Star has learned the three men involved in the latter episode have been fired by Vale Inco, even though their case has yet to be heard in court.

All three have been charged with harassment, and one of the men was charged with assault. They are to be back in court in February.

Ball said it "may or may not be Steelworkers unilaterally" who have been involved in incidents of violence.

The most strikers are legally doing their picket and other duties and not causing trouble. But violent episodes seem to be escalating in the last few weeks, said Ball.

Coincidentally, the USW has also filed a bad-faith bargaining complaint against Vale Inco with the Ontario Labour Relations Board. Last week, Vale Inco began operating the Copper Cliff Smelter Complex using staff, management, unionized office and technical workers, and some outside contractors.

Smoke has been lightly billowing out of the Superstack as Vale Inco attempts to get up to half production with one of two furnaces at the smelter. Restarting that furnace has been a sore point with strikers, USW Local 6500 president John Fera said earlier this week.

Ball said it may look as if Vale Inco is getting more aggressive against strikers, but he said it has been consistent since the beginning of the strike July 13 about two things. One is it will not tolerate unacceptable behaviour on picket lines, especially violence. The other is that it intends to operate in Sudbury without its striking production and maintenance workers.

Ball defended his company's right to fire employees whom it decides are misbehaving on picket lines -- and elsewhere -- whether the courts agree or not.

For instance, one employee was fired early in the strike after being charged with a weapons offence. The case was later dismissed in court. Despite that, Vale Inco reserves the right to fire employees it believes are breaching the company's standards of acceptable behaviour, even if the courts don't rule those actions as criminal.

Criminal law and Vale Inco's internal policies are independent of each other, said Ball.

"Does anyone really believe observance of the law should be suspended during a strike?" Vale Inco asked in its ad in The Sudbury Star.

It also said websites that "elicit violent and intimidating behaviour" have no place in this labour dispute.

Some strikers are posting photographs and information about replacement workers, whom they call "scabs," on a website.

Ball maintains that Vale Inco investigates and completes due diligence when it comes to employees it believes are unruly. It does not randomly fire people, he said.

Laurentian University political scientist John Peters says the kind of behaviour that Vale Inco is engaging in is increasingly common among large employers.

The worldwide recession has given employers the opportunity to go after workers' wages, pensions and benefits -- and even their jobs -- under the guise of cutting expenses to match dropping revenues.